Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jan 21, 2017 - 09:35pm PT
|
recognizing the merits of everyone in an unbiased way, and providing equal opportunities to all.
That's not "feminism"
Feminism is just another "ism"
It's far far higher than that .....
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Jan 21, 2017 - 09:54pm PT
|
For sure, Kevin. I have that duty.
I also recognize that if a writer seeks too much counsel, other people will be writing the work for her/him!
I get that. But I thought this was a good quandary to broach, in context of our discussion, because, as Ed suggested, we must be willing to question our own assumptions, and when someone tells me I'm being sexist, I take a good hard look at it.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Jan 21, 2017 - 09:56pm PT
|
The word babe for instance. I see it as a term of affection, or as a description of a beautiful woman, feminists see it as a belittling, sexually suggestive term. So we disagree. Which interpretation is more positive and loving, and which is more negative and combative? Hardcore Feminists want to impose their perspectives and standards on men and their fellow women, a effort that denies equal rights.
Well, it all depends on your perspective, BOY. After all, BOY, one has to factor in what you mean, and what it means to your target.
BOY, a term of affection to someone with whom you have no specific relationship, is often unwelcome. See how comfortable you are with the waitstaff calling your wife "Babe".
Context is everything, BOY. You may not like being called "boy". You may be black, for all I know, in which case it would be particularly insulting. But it's use generally means "to put you in your place".
My experience with professional women, is that when they are addressed by a man by such endearments, unless they are CLOSE personal friends, is immediate repulsion. It's sort of the verbal equivalent of grabbing them by the TRUMP. Something they might enjoy their partner doing is NOT acceptable behavior for anyone else. And it's up to them to decide, not you.
|
|
nah000
climber
no/w/here
|
|
|
Jan 21, 2017 - 09:58pm PT
|
TB: if the definition of feminism is the securing of equal rights for "women" and "men" then it would be an arrogant step too far to censor the self identification of a particular group of women. end stop.
other women [and/or men] may not like "yo babes" just like some non-het/cis don't like other non-het/cis reclaming "queer", "tranny", etc.
question always comes back to who is doing the naming... because if this is truly about equality than the ultimate equality is always going to be the ability to self-identify regardless what an outside individual/group says/thinks...
i.e. the circular definition at the end of the one article that was posted [feminism is about equality, ergo it cannot go too far] is in practice and imesho bull shIt.
your situation is a perfect example of feminist thought going too far. just because [one/some? of] your editors don't approve of the self identification made by other women doesn't mean they should be rewriting history and controlling the self identification of other women...
the moment we do that is the moment we over correct and throw the car into a spin headed for the opposite ditch than it was originally headed.
that said kudos to you for being cognizant [and sorry you've got another amab responding, even if my life has been pretty engaged with identity politics]
best of luck and look forward to reading your story.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Jan 21, 2017 - 09:58pm PT
|
the potential for death should be there.
I don't know about this. I'm not sure I'm on board with gladiator-type mayhem.
In the last 100 years, only 2 olympians died in competition, and both were from not drinking enough water:
Francisco Lázaro (21), Portugal – Runner – 1912, Stockholm – electrolyte imbalance[1]
Knut Jensen (23), Denmark – Cyclist – 1960, Rome – heat stroke[2]
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Jan 21, 2017 - 10:17pm PT
|
But if I use the name women have taken for themselves, and refer to them accordingly, as in Yo Babes, in historical context even, I'm now being sexist or somehow naďvely or intentionally supporting sexism?
Probably the best way is to put it in quotes, which indicates that it comes from them, not from you. You might want to include a short sentence following the first use "which might not be used today".
I the situation where you are trying to report factual things, I think inclusion of such a thing gives a context to the group at the time.
Does the use of "Yo Babes" represent a grovelling, so that the participants can be laughed at and accepted by the male group? Who knows? Such things certainly happen.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Jan 21, 2017 - 11:30pm PT
|
Ai yi yi, amigos, am I the only one that glazes over as soon as I see that Ed is posting?
probably not...
|
|
ecdh
climber
the east
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2017 - 12:42am PT
|
i suppose this fits here....
last winter i attempted to co-instigate a womens ice climbing trip to iran, a country with a reputation for many things including where women fit into society. the initial idea was greeted with some interest from more than 2 well known lady climbers and women who move and shake within the climbing world. their names will not be mentioned.
much more enthusiastic was the contribution from women climbers in iran. a strong contingency they out climb most iranian men at a comp level. they welcomed foreign women to hang out and train with them, in part as men and women training together in iran raises eyebrows amongst the athlete community, tho its irrelevant when actually climbing. the issue seems to arise when things get serious enough for the mountaineering associations to be involved. perhaps thats not surprising.
it must be said male climbers in iran were enthusiastic once the idea got clarity.
western men did little more than wince at the idea...
my own role was nothing more than a cheerleader for women, iran and interesting ice climbing. id do my bit to help, but the gig was what the ladies wanted it to be.
anyway, very rapidly the sponsors of our great lady climbers gave an outright no - despite those same companies sponsoring women climbers in iran. not wanting to go rogue, the ladies just complied - a debate unto itself. the idea of going unsponsored met with zero interest...
in the end, what happened was some non-famous, non-sponsored climbers went, had a great time climbing with iranian women and men, and basically did what our industry wouldnt support. there was no big agenda, no one got taken hostage, no politics, no revolutionary guards, no problems. they did more for hands-across-the-divide than most leaders have done. did i mention they ate like royalty and skied, climbed rock and got some alpine in too?
so feminism, cowardice and bigotry in climbing....? it goes to the f*#king core.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2017 - 01:20am PT
|
do guys just make themselves a doormat to any fanatical ruling coming their way for the next 100 years in the interest of setting things straight for all? I can't see that working.
You mean utterly fanatical rulings like women having the vote? Equal access to education? Equal pay for equal work? Contraceptive and reproductive rights? Paid parental leave? And, yeah, that sort of thing might well open the door to even more fanatical things like paying tribes more than pennies on the dollar they currently settle on for all our endless treaty abrogations and serial thefts of tribal resources.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2017 - 07:09am PT
|
No, I don't mean any of those things, Healyje, Joseph.
Not even by a long shot, so thanks for seeking clarification.
You make it seem a fool's errand to speak plainly about the notion that there are practical and reasonable limits to the tactics employed in the faithful and productive execution of what I hold to be a valid and essential stiving, and one of the most vitally important movements of our times, and throw me on the other side of the fence to support your argument.
You paint me a misogynist and a racist. Why do that?
Here is what I said at the beginning of the thread:
This isn't to say that issues like gender and race relations don't still have some ways to go toward resolution.
Her [Davita's] point is: don't be petty and choose your battles. This doesn't weaken the cause, it strengthens it.
*Maybe Jay is right, and my reading comprehension is off, and it's not what Davita Gurian said.
But it's what I'm saying.
Bruce Hildenbrand: really good of you to post up the article and get this thread going.
For my part, I don't seek the perspectives of the younger generation as much as I might. Thanks everyone.
Cheers,
Roy
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2017 - 09:05am PT
|
Roy, I guess because I still very much have a hard time with this characterization:
do guys just make themselves a doormat to any fanatical ruling coming their way for the next 100 years in the interest of setting things straight for all? I can't see that working.
My post was a request for clarification, maybe a bit rough, but yesterday being the day that it was I could have be a bit sensitive about the issue. So more explicitly then, what exactly would you consider a 'fanatical ruling'?
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2017 - 09:35am PT
|
I'm not going to play cat and mouse, Joseph.
You supported me on my medical issue thread, with much of your tactful analysis and intellectual grit, and I can't see that we are philosophically ill-aligned on the major issues in this thread.
Please go reread the full post from which you took the excerpt.
My example is there. And it's in my prior request of the readers here to help me with a small writing challenge.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2017 - 09:40am PT
|
Healyje
If you think that Roy is a misogynist and a racist, then you are definitely projecting some very serious garbage and hate coming from inside your very own self.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2017 - 11:16am PT
|
A man.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Colorado & Nepal
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2017 - 01:18pm PT
|
It has to do with power. Women get assaulted raped and murdered by men, not the other way around. That is the same reason you don't call Black men boys. It was white men who enslaved and lynched them, not the other way around. It's offensive to call sports teams after Native Americans, especially since most sports teams are named after animals. That's because genocide was practiced against Native Americans as though they were animals rather than humans, not the other way around.
I find it amazing that some men can't see the discrepancy in power in this situations. They might argue that rock climbers don't rape and murder women so it's ok to call them by the names of men who do, but I don't think most women would appreciate that distinction.
Women can call themselves babes, Black men can call themselves boys and even the N word, but white men can't. You maybe weren't involved, but white men were. That's just a sad historical fact.
That said, I personally think the fact checker in Roy's case is being overly sensitive if he specifies that Yo Babes is what the Yosemite women called themselves and that is made clear. To me, the question for him, is whether he wants to risk being raked over the coals in letters to the editor by other women who think similarly to the fact checker. Some battles are not worth fighting but It's his call.
|
|
cat t.
climber
california
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2017 - 01:55pm PT
|
Tarbuster (and Jan as well), your thoughts on naming are spot-on. As for what's on the "list of improprieties," as you put it, I think the list of truly off-limits words is exceptionally short. I would think "babe" falls more into the "annoying" category. It would be obnoxious to call every pretty young waitress "babe" or name your pre-teen's soccer team the "Ball Babes," but I am surprised that it would be found to be offensive in historical context.
Namely: do guys just make themselves a doormat to any fanatical ruling coming their way for the next 100 years in the interest of setting things straight for all? I can't see that working.
No, but I think most of the examples leveled here don't qualify as "fanatical rulings." Erring on the side of caution and politeness does not hurt anyone. I think your response to your fact-checker is the exact appropriate one: you've examined your own intent, and also thought carefully about why someone else might be offended. Criticisms of word choice are often met with far more hostility than you've displayed. The default response to concern about phrasing usually communicates, "no, your concerns are invalid; you are not qualified to interpret my meaning and take offense." Complete dismissal of a person's concerns do not advance understanding, but it is valid for you to consider why someone might take offense at your words and ultimately decide that you believe your intended audience will understand your intent.
As for things that might actually be "fanatical rulings"--I think it's important to stay grounded in reality here. You can find obscure corners of the internet that believe ANYTHING. I'm sure there are angry women on Tumblr who actually hate men, but holding the fringe up as an example of how feminism is too radical or out of touch would be like thinking homeopath-anti-vaxxers represent the views of all west-coast liberals. At the moment we still live in a society that wants to deny basic reproductive rights to women.
Edit: I also like neebee's idea of a footnote. I love footnotes.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Outside the Asylum
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2017 - 02:09pm PT
|
http://www.baffinbabes.com/about/
A name they chose for themselves, mind. And Norway is a rather different place than the USA, having had several female prime ministers, and with about half of all elected officials women for some time.
|
|
cat t.
climber
california
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2017 - 02:56pm PT
|
And Norway is a rather different place than the USA, having had several female prime ministers, and with about half of all elected officials women for some time.
The words that hold negative, sexist power in the USA would not be expected have the same weight in a society that is considerably less sexist.
(Even within the US, the experiences of different economic groups are very different--hence the term "intersectionality." Those experiences are going to result in varied responses to the same negative stimulus. My experience as a middle class white woman is very different than that of a woman of color or a transgender woman or a disabled woman or an economically disadvantaged woman. White feminism undeniably has its own extensive history of exclusion.)
Edit: Tarbuster wrote
Her [Davita's] point is: don't be petty and choose your battles. This doesn't weaken the cause, it strengthens it. I think her position is a rather privileged one. (I realize the word "privilege" has taken on a complicated connotation recently, but it was the best word I could think of.) The sexism I encounter most frequently is dudes catcalling me when I'm riding my bike. It's not worth my time to worry about it. If I (white, PhD, Stanford) were to make that my cause, it might seem petty, but I can very easily put myself in the shoes of women who DON'T live in a liberal haven who would be rightfully afraid of violence from the men who constantly catcall them, and their complaints are far from petty.
|
|
cat t.
climber
california
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2017 - 03:22pm PT
|
the particular relationship between the individuals involved Understanding the particular relationship between two individuals is key to ANY successful communication. You could probably joke about fighting a friend, but if you said the exact same words to a stranger they'd assume you were literally trying to start a fight.
The burden of responsibility to create an equal society does not lie solely on the shoulders of women.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Colorado & Nepal
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2017 - 05:31pm PT
|
And btw Jan, women do murder and assault men.
And this is just the same argument given for discriminating against any other group too. Just because one out of a hundred murders is a woman against a man, doesn't excuse the other 99. Some Native Americans brutalized white folks in very savage ways, but that doesn't excuse the general process of genocide.
You girls gotta give a little to get what you want.
I'm sure you didn't mean it this way, but I've heard that statement many times in regard to giving men sex and getting something in return. My generation of feminists said no thanks, we'll work 2 or 3 times harder than a man to get to the same place. The next generation said, why should we have to?
The third generation is saying we don't even want to hear mention of it. The burden of responsibility to create an equal society does not lie solely on the shoulders of women.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!